Being thrilled with your K3 is fine, I think everyone can respect that! I am thrilled with my Icom 7600 but the difference between some of you K3 guys and everyone else is that you honestly think you have the Best Radios on the Planet when everyone that has not been drinking from the Elecraft Kool-aid knows that's complete BS.

I stopped posting serious replies to this thread when the talk became that the K3 was better than the 990. I mean come on folks give Kenwood their time in the Sun and stop the BS! Kenwood enthusiasts have waited for 10+ years for Kenwood to make a really good modern Rig and now that they come out with the 590 and the 990 you guys are going to rain on their parade with BS talk about the K3 being better than a 990.

The numbers don't lie, your ears do. Hard test data beats anecdotes any time - this is why rockets are built using math and science and not hunches.

Still, your fancy Japanese rigs have more buttons, and weigh a lot more, I'll give you that.

Numbers presented in such a way to favor one aspect that one tester finds personally important over other numbers that may be more significant to other users DO lie and distort. Sherwood's myopic view of 2 kHz blocking dynamic range used in his sorting is an example. Sort by another column and the order of radio from best to worst changes dramatically.

Ah, still a few last gasps left in the topic and yet no one has admitted that he bought and still operates the worst of the two radios in question. Thank goodness this character named Sherwood is on the scene to make best rig buying decisions for hams that are otherwise unable to do so on their own.

I am sure for you that his numbers make all the other short comings bearable and I also imagine that you have a poster sized copy of that chart on the wall in your shack for comfort.

I can't help but find it amusing that someone would buy a radio based on a set of numbers that are extremely difficult to measure accurately even on high end commercial test equipment much less measured with the gear I see on his website. Then add into that the fact that he offers little detail into the methodology of how his measurements are done or when his equipment was calibrated and might I go further and add in the fact that he uses a single sample measurement which in the real world means the test are already invalid! Then we add in the years between each different unit being tested on said accuracy unknown equipment and walla we end up with a chart that when sorted by one mans idea of the most important aspect of a Radio it makes you and some other people believe you have the best Radios in the world. LOL

Sleep well my friend and keep that Nifty card close.

73'sRobertKD8MJR

PS.Did you ever read Mr Sherwoods Closing Comments about his Chart?Here it is:

"Don’t get obsessed with minor variations of a few dB. Luckily most radios are not stressed most of the time we operate them. The worst stress is a CW pile up.You also have to like operational aspects of a radio, not just its numbers.As a ham, you will be sitting in front of a radio for hours each week over a period of years, thus ergonomics, ease of use, and listening fatigue should be taken into consideration. Personally I like big radios with big knobs, except mobile when small is good!Comments are always appreciated.73, Rob Sherwood, NC0B "

« Last Edit: August 04, 2013, 08:30:39 PM by KD8MJR »

Logged

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” (Mark Twain)

I purchased a 3000 a month ago and have used it in several cw sprints and the naqp-cw this weekend. It was a pleasure to use and I could sneak between two very close signals and get the qso just as easily as I can with my k3. This Rx is very quiet as others have said and from a users perspective there is no difference in Rx sensitivity compared to my K3 - I will give a very slight nod to the k3 with respect to selectivity.

However, sitting for 3+ hours straight was considerably LESS fatiguing on the ears/head with the ftdx3000 than the k3. Sherwood should also capture "usability"

I purchased a 3000 a month ago and have used it in several cw sprints and the naqp-cw this weekend. It was a pleasure to use and I could sneak between two very close signals and get the qso just as easily as I can with my k3. This Rx is very quiet as others have said and from a users perspective there is no difference in Rx sensitivity compared to my K3 - I will give a very slight nod to the k3 with respect to selectivity.

However, sitting for 3+ hours straight was considerably LESS fatiguing on the ears/head with the ftdx3000 than the k3. Sherwood should also capture "usability"

Sherwood specifically dislikes the Elecraft K3 because of its audio distortion on receive. Elecraft tried to fix it after Sherwood commented on it many times, but even after the fix Sherwood still does not like it and still criticizes the K3 to the dismay of Elecraft. It is interesting to note that Sherwood uses an ICOM IC-781 and modified Drakes. Take a look where those radios fall on the list. If his sorting is so important and determines how "good" a radio is, why does Sherwood not personally own any radios on the top 5 of that list?

If the (you) in your response refers to me in my post please be advised that I only have a possible future interest in the two rigs mentioned. At present the closest thing I have to a K3 is a lowly K1 with no room on my shack wall for a poster sized chart anyway and the last thing I would do is take a trip to Sherwood Forest and see how it stacks up against a Weber Tri Bander. Some times it's worthwhile to read between the lines.

Sherwood specifically dislikes the Elecraft K3 because of its audio distortion on receive. Elecraft tried to fix it after Sherwood commented on it many times, but even after the fix Sherwood still does not like it and still criticizes the K3 to the dismay of Elecraft. It is interesting to note that Sherwood uses an ICOM IC-781 and modified Drakes. Take a look where those radios fall on the list. If his sorting is so important and determines how "good" a radio is, why does Sherwood not personally own any radios on the top 5 of that list?

That's funny, isn't it? I've tried to make this argument a half-dozen times and it always falls flat. Hams like numbers. They can point at them and justify spending the big bucks.

I also wrote way back on the first page that the K3 and the FTDX3000 are fundamentally different radios and that someone who liked one would be unlikely to like the other. I stand by that assertion and point to this thread as anecdotal evidence in support.

K8GU hopefully this K3 Rubbish is now finished, the K3 is what it is and nothing more.It's certainly not even close to holding the title of the Best Radio ever made and anyone who believes that is just kidding themselves.

Logged

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” (Mark Twain)

K8GU hopefully this K3 Rubbish is now finished, the K3 is what it is and nothing more.It's certainly not even close to holding the title of the Best Radio ever made and anyone who believes that is just kidding themselves.

It's closer than lots of rigs. If you like lots of whizzy knobs and cute color LCD graphics, it's probably not your bag though.

However if you like to be able to configure, for example, your AGC beyond slow, fast, or off, it's probably your kind of radio.

Anyway the KX3 seems to be an even better performer than the K3. The KX3, in addition to having some of the highest dynamic range figures tested, has the best sensitivity of any radio tested by Sherwood.

I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.

Logged

“A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.” (Mark Twain)

I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.

Pretty sure or do you know? The K3 allows adjustment of AGC decay, hold, pulse, slope and threshold allowing the user to customize AGC in pretty much any way he/she would like. I ask because from what I can tell through the use of Google the 7600 has some AGC adjustment available but nowhere near what the K3 has.

I am pretty sure lots of Radios can configure the AGC beyond slow medium and fast.My Icom 7600 allows me to customize the speed for each of those settings, so it's a safe bet that most of the other 7xxx models can do the same and probably so can most of the newer rigs from other companies.

As for Sherwood's numbers ehh let's not even go there again.

Pretty sure or do you know? The K3 allows adjustment of AGC decay, hold, pulse, slope and threshold allowing the user to customize AGC in pretty much any way he/she would like. I ask because from what I can tell through the use of Google the 7600 has some AGC adjustment available but nowhere near what the K3 has.

The KX3, in addition to having some of the highest dynamic range figures tested, has the best sensitivity of any radio tested by Sherwood.

Unless you live in an extremely quite location (like with no neighbors within a few miles) and only run 10m or 6m, any radio made today is more than sensitive enough. That extra sensitivity just comes through as extra noise.

Copyright 2000-2018 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement